Thomas Dalton wrote:
A while back I wrote about a self-publicising vanity author. One of the details I'd liked to have note was the complete (or near-complete) absence of his books in public library catalogues, but it's almost impossible to actually find a way to cite a "negative search" much less a positive result...
Indeed, that would end up being OR - quite simple OR, but OR all the same. It's annoying when you know something that apparently no-one has published, but there isn't much we can do about it. (Unless you happen to be an expert on the subject and can publish it yourself)
You can't make the real problem in an article go away by writing the letters "OR" on a post-it note, and sticking it on. That's being simplistic.
Ec